| Literature DB >> 33253262 |
Karen Triep1, Nenad Torbica1, Luigi Raio2, Daniel Surbek2, Olga Endrich1,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With an increasing rate of caesarean sections as well as rising numbers of multiple pregnancies, valid classifications for benchmarking are needed. The Robson classification provides a method to group cases with caesarean section in order to assess differences in outcome across regions and sites. In this study we set up a novel method of classification by using routinely collected health data. We hypothesize i that routinely collected health data can be used to apply complex medical classifications and ii that the Robson classification is capable of classifying mothers and their corresponding newborn into meaningful groups with regard to outcome. METHODS ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33253262 PMCID: PMC7703923 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242736
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Flow chart Robson classification (Robson et al., 2002) according to WHO (2017) Robson classification: Implementation manual.
Validation of a random sample of 100 cases.
| Coding and/or discharge documentation positive | Coding and/or discharge documentation negative | total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SQL classification | first validation | 98 | 2 | 100 |
| validation after correction of the code | 100 | 0 | 100 |
Count cases per Robson class and percent, cases with CS, per year.
| number of mother cases | ||||
| Robson Class | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 |
| 1 | 111 | 114 | 107 | 143 |
| 2 | 37 | 44 | 65 | 22 |
| 3 | 45 | 52 | 38 | 64 |
| 4 | 9 | 12 | 10 | 8 |
| 5 | 89 | 110 | 123 | 132 |
| 6 | 56 | 37 | 37 | 45 |
| 7 | 32 | 33 | 19 | 35 |
| 8 | 87 | 106 | 105 | 83 |
| 9 | 28 | 30 | 25 | 34 |
| 10 | 153 | 142 | 131 | 145 |
| all | 647 | 680 | 660 | 711 |
| percent of cases CS | ||||
| Robson Class | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 |
| 1 | 17.16 | 16.76 | 16.21 | 20.11 |
| 2 | 5.72 | 6.47 | 9.85 | 3.09 |
| 3 | 6.96 | 7.65 | 5.76 | 9.00 |
| 4 | 1.39 | 1.76 | 1.52 | 1.13 |
| 5 | 13.76 | 16.18 | 18.64 | 18.57 |
| 6 | 8.66 | 5.44 | 5.61 | 6.33 |
| 7 | 4.95 | 4.85 | 2.88 | 4.92 |
| 8 | 13.45 | 15.59 | 15.91 | 11.67 |
| 9 | 4.33 | 4.41 | 3.79 | 4.78 |
| 10 | 23.65 | 20.88 | 19.85 | 20.39 |
| all | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
Fig 2Complication indicators* per Robson class, % of cases, mother cases, 2014–2017.
*ICD codes text see S2 Table.
Fig 4Distribution of Robson classes per newborn cases with intensive care unit (ICU) treatment.
Fig 5Distribution of Robson classes: Inlier SwissDRG mother cases (batch grouper SwissDRG [30]).
Fig 6Distribution of Robson classes: High outlier SwissDRG mother cases (batch grouper SwissDRG [30]).